Race Balance: Hoblings

Do you believe that Hobling Racial Downsides/Req's are in line with available Racial Abilities?


  • Total voters
    69
  • Poll closed .

Saephis

Squire
In the interest of exploring the races, one of the races I've oft heard repeated that would likely see sharp increases in 2.0 has been the Hobling, due to the lifting of current restrictions around the race.

Current racial requirements are either prosthetic or makeup-applied sideburns, with some text around liking coin/"profits".
Current racial downsides are -1 Body, inability to be fighters, or wield two handed weapons.
Current racial benefits are Racial Dodge (Purchaseable Once), Resist Poison, and half-cost to Legerdemain.

New racial requirements: No change
New racial downsides: Hearty costs more, due to being 'frail'
New racial upsides are Racial Dodge (No limit on purchase), Resist Poison
 

Saephis

Squire
I'm answering 'no', due to the low-requirements to high-reward.

While the cost for Racial Dodge may be high, I'll again state our game has a long range of levels. Easily half the persons I've talked to on the Race topic, post-2.0, have cited "Yes, I'm going hobling, and buying Dodge at least 3 times". This is often expanded upon due to the low requirements (Sideburns) and nearly nonexistent RP requirements.
 

Tantarus

Squire
While I was surprised when I first read this change, and that it seems to have stuck I am not sure I consider it a problem. Don't forget Scavengers will also have this ability. I realize the make up reqs are harsher, but they get the best racials and no class restrictions.

I have been a hobling for a few years now. And honestly I am more excited to be able to go fighter then the racial dodges. (Well except for the melee nerfs, celestial it is!) Though that also makes me biased a bit. I went hobling for 1 dodge as an earth templar.

That said if it becomes a problem is easy to revert back. My impression is that owners are fine with defenses because they don't cause the same problem as offensive abilities for plot as far as scaling goes.

I wish you put a 3rd option of indifferent or needs more testing, or I play a hobling so biased.

If I had it my way they would take resist poison away from hoblings as well as no fighter restriction. I never understood that restriction.
 

Graham Wolsey

Scholar
Denver Staff
Marshal
I'd remove all the Hobling disadvantages and keep the way Racial Dodge and Resist Poison work in 1.3.

The racial requirements are really minor and just resist poison is a big advantage.
 

Saephis

Squire
Also I would be curious if people are fine with scavengers having unlimited dodge buys.
Personally speaking, yes. The far more expansive racial and role play requirements outside "I like money and have some carpet on my face" make Scavenger racial-selections far more palatable. But, that's a topic for another thread.. technically. :)
 

Lurin

Duke
I often find large discrepancies between what people say they will do and what they actually do. If you want to dedicate 10 Levels to having 10 dodges, that's fine with me. That's 4 Columns of spells, 3 points of damage all day, etc. People generally need 1-2 dodges for DFMs/Insta Resurrection effects. Beyond that, it's rare to see a dodge blown on a web etc. (it happens and would happen marginally more but it's not that bad)
 

Saephis

Squire
If you want to dedicate 10 Levels to having 10 dodges, that's fine with me.
An extreme example at 10 purchases, however for the 32(ish)+ level crowd, I can easily say I intend to put at least 5 purchases into Resist Spell if I continue to play a Dark Elf. I also intend to buy as many Dodges via the Stun Limb -> Rogue Skill 'count' as I can, due to how simply good Dodges are. 25+ level characters/players putting 3-6 dodges on their sheet at the cost of some drawn in sideburn-extensions seems out of balance for, arguably, one of the best Player-versus-Player Racial packages in system.
 

Graham Wolsey

Scholar
Denver Staff
Marshal
People discount the value of buying things in multiples.

1 dodge doesn't fundamentally change most exchanges, however 3 dodges can provide room to kill a caster.


Class balance is also wildly different based on racial options. A rogue having the ability to purchase additional dodges at 10 Build per dodge is a negligible advantage.

A fighter which desperately needs dodges to be able to function would happily trade less than a weapon prof for 2-3 dodges.
 

Lurin

Duke
I agree Resist magic is on my list of things that need to be reviewed due to it's comparatively "closer" cost to resist binding at 4 for example.
 

Graham Wolsey

Scholar
Denver Staff
Marshal
I agree Resist magic is on my list of things that need to be reviewed due to it's comparatively "closer" cost to resist binding at 4 for example.
I totally agree with this analysis. Racial Dodge at 10 would be balanced if the classes were also balanced. Resist Magic for Dark Elves seems way more problematic for me personally.
 
I've said it before, but it bears repeating. 10 BP is a higher cost than any skill it will be stopping, even if the skill is delivered by a split class character. The only way 10 BP is equal or less is if the skill was taken by an off-class character (fighter memorizing spells) or in the rare cases of a split tree scholar (a 9th level spell from the second tree costs 10 BP). That is the main reason that I really don't mind unlimited potential to purchase dodges.

Also, I don't worry about this stepping on the toes of rogues because the cost is not negligible. 10 BP is a massive cost. Very little in the game costs that much and players only willingly purchase something for that much if it is HIGHLY efficient (shields for scholars, for example) or absolutely mandatory to their IG plans (orc fighters buying R&W to become nobles, for example). Furthermore, at some point the player will feel they have enough (that is true for every single defense), at which point, they have spent twice as much as rogues have for the exact same ability, which is a big hit to efficiency.

Also, I think there is a bit of an understatement on how frustrating sideburns (and big eyebrows if I remember correctly) are. I have never personally played a hobling, but I have many friends who have and their general assessment is that the makeup requirements are a meaningful detractor (way more so than elf ears or tiny horns). I don't know exactly why. I suspect it has something to do with the amount of spirit gum that is required.

-MS
 

Saephis

Squire
My focus on the thread is Racial Requirements (Role Play, Makeup/Prosthetics/etc.) to Racial Bonuses, not the specific skills, costs themselves.

Current-day, with a single purchase of Racial Dodge with Resist Poison, weighed against "You can't access an entire class", I'm really unconcerned on Hoblings' bonuses.

Removing that restriction, and opening up the number of dodges.. that's where the issue is, I feel. You're effectively playing Human+ with a cadre of available racial bonuses.
 

Saephis

Squire
I wish you put a 3rd option of indifferent or needs more testing, or I play a hobling so biased.
I was hoping that, in leaving a Yes/No, folks would look outside "what's best for me" and go towards "Why do I feel the way I do". Maybe in error, but in the hope and effort of contributing to a better Forum atmosphere, that's my hope. :)
 
This thread seems as good as any to make a point about the analysis of these new rules. PvP is highly discouraged in our game. There is literally a section in the rulebook that discourages it. Obviously, there is no ban, but the intent is clear: Keep to a minimum.

Furthermore, 1 v 1 battles are rare in this game. Group vs. group battles are the norm, ranging from 6-person modules to large wave battles. Analyzing rules in terms of "duels" is basically doing analysis based on corner case situations.

This is important to my thoughts on Racial Dodge, because I don't see it as a way for a fighter to beat a scholar in a one-on-one fight. I see it as a "Oh #&%&" button when everything is falling apart and you need to run or as an ace up the sleeve when an effect hits at exactly the wrong time and would almost certainly cascade into a TPK. I play a Scout. I have some Dodges. I know exactly when and where I tend to use them and the scenarios that I often see being cited simply aren't the scenarios where I use my Dodges. And, from experience on both sides of the fence, I believe my approach to using Dodges are similar to other individuals who have access to the skill.

-MS
 

Tantarus

Squire
I was hoping that, in leaving a Yes/No, folks would look outside "what's best for me" and go towards "Why do I feel the way I do". Maybe in error, but in the hope and effort of contributing to a better Forum atmosphere, that's my hope. :)
Yeah, but honestly people can be undecided. I tend to think unlimited dodges could be a bit broken but I have heard some convincing arguments why it is fine. I honestly don't know how they will effect pve. It is really hard to tell with all the other changes. I mean look at how spell parry changed in 0.9 That seems far more busted then anything to me.

That said dodge is very powerful, Just having 1 as an earth templar has saved me at least 2 resses over the last few years. But giving up 2 profs or a column of spells is a real cost. After 2 or 3 dodges, I think diminishing returns is likely. I have gone many events without even using my 1.
 

Avaran

Baron
Analyzing rules in terms of "duels" is basically doing analysis based on corner case situations.

This is important to my thoughts on Racial Dodge, because I don't see it as a way for a fighter to beat a scholar in a one-on-one fight. I see it as a "Oh #&%&" button when everything is falling apart and you need to run or as an ace up the sleeve when an effect hits at exactly the wrong time and would almost certainly cascade into a TPK. I play a Scout. I have some Dodges. I know exactly when and where I tend to use them and the scenarios that I often see being cited simply aren't the scenarios where I use my Dodges. And, from experience on both sides of the fence, I believe my approach to using Dodges are similar to other individuals who have access to the skill.
I generally agree with this assessment. Although I would add that if there is something that needs to die, and using a Dodge will keep me putting damage into said target, I will use it. It has offensive application as well, and that shouldn't be forgotten either.

I want to bring up the related point/question:
How often did Magic Items save you from having to use a Dodge? How many Cloak/Bane effects save you from using Dodges? I know if I have a Cloak/Bane versus an effect group, I will always use that before a Dodge. I don't want you to answer, just think about it. Those rituals are gone (outside of HM obviously) in 2.0, which means there are far fewer per day, free defenses.

This will make Dodge more valuable. This will make racial resists more valuable. This will make High Magic more valuable. This will make Spell Parry significantly more valuable. This will make Racial Dodge far more powerful.

If nothing else, it is something that Plot teams must keep in mind when scaling encounters, NPC's, and BBG's.

There is literally a section in the rulebook that discourages it.
Reference please? I think I might be blind (or the 5 hits to the head I took yesterday have made me lag IRL more so than usual) but I can't find this.
 
Last edited:

Saephis

Squire
This thread seems as good as any to make a point about the analysis of these new rules. PvP is highly discouraged in our game. There is literally a section in the rulebook that discourages it. Obviously, there is no ban, but the intent is clear: Keep to a minimum.
You can't plan around "Please don't"s, unfortunately, and while the hope may be infrequent, races and skills should be balanced against one another, not something noted as a goal -- system balances system, and in this case the extraneous-system (Read: roleplay and makeup requirements) serve to balance that where specific SYSTEM UP and SYSTEM DOWN don't balance explicitly.

Can you share what section of the book you're referencing? I haven't read it cover-to-cover in quite some time, however on a text-search, I can't find any references to "PvP", "Player versus", "CvC", any of the instances of "Discourage", or a handful of other text searches.
 
I guess the phrase should be: There WAS a section. I didn't realize it had been removed. Oh well. I take that part back. But even without that discouragement, the section on "playing a bad guy" certainly makes it clear that you can't just outright be obvious about being a bad guy, which implies that PvP is very rare.

-MS
 

Saephis

Squire
There's a pretty steady recounting of Group-Versus-Group action that tells me its still quite alive-and-"well" in some chapters, (un)fortunately (Views by others, at least, leave experience in that varying).

It still remains, though, that Races should net-out for Cost-versus-Reward in most folks' mind, and (at current, at least) Hoblings seem to have a feeling of a larger number that its outside that balance.
 
Top